Seth Carter v. State of Texas’s Empirical Analysis
177 U.S. 442 · 1900
Citation profile
83 federal appellate · 19 district · 194 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 512 later decisions (102 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2019 · most notably Glasser v. United States (1942), Lewis Director Arizona Department of Corrections v. Casey (1996)
83 federal appellate · 19 district · 194 state decisions — followed in 26 states
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Strauder v. West Virginia · Neal v. Delaware · Gibson v. State of Mississippi · United States v. Gale
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 512 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“* * * Summing up precisely the effect of earlier decisions, this Court thus stated the principle in Carter v. State of Texas, 177 U.S. 442 , 447, 20 S.Ct. 687, 44 L.Ed. 839, in relation to exclusion from service on grand juries: `Whenever by any action of a state, whether through its Legislature, through its courts, or through its executive or administrative officers, all persons of the African race are excluded, solely because of their race or color, from serving as grand jurors in the criminal prosecution of a person of the African race, the equal protection of the laws is denied to him, contrary to the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States. Strauder v. State of West Virginia, 100 U.S. 303 , 25 L.Ed. 664; Neal v. Delaware, 103 U.S. 370 , 397, 26 L. Ed. 567; Gibson v. State of Mississippi, 162 U.S. 565 , 16 S.Ct. 904, 40 L.Ed. 1075.' This statement was repeated in the same terms in Rogers v. State of Alabama, 192 U.S. 226 , 231, 24 S.Ct. 257, 48 L.Ed. 417, and again in Martin v. State of Texas, 200 U.S. 316 , 319, 26 S.Ct. 338, 50 L.Ed. 497. The principle is equally applicable to a similar exclusion of negroes from service on petit juries. Strauder v. State of West Virginia, supra; Martin v. State of Texas, supra.”
12 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The showing thus made, including, as it did, the fact (so generally known that the court felt obliged to take judicial notice of it) that no colored citizen had ever been summoned as a juror in the courts of the State,—although its colored population exceeded twenty thousand in 1870, and in 1880 exceeded twenty-six thousand, in a total population of less than one hundred and fifty thousand,-—-presented a prima facie case of denial, by .the officers charged with the selection of grand and petit jurors, of that equality of protection which has been secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States. It was, we think, under all the circumstances, a violent presumption which the State court indulged, that such uniform exclusion of that race from juries, during a period of many years, was solely because, in the judgment of those officers, fairly exercised, the black race in Delaware were utterly disqualified, by want of intelligence, experience, or moral integrity, to sit on juries.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.